Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="HeavyG" data-source="post: 505900" data-attributes="member: 431">Granted.&nbsp; Your enemies can't target the rogue, just like if he was invisible.They still have to be 60' away or the spells will cancel each other, thus negating this tactic.&nbsp; And they're everybit as useless against the rogue's opponents as the enemies are useless against the rogue.&nbsp; Sure, they might fire arrows blindly in the dark (like that's going to work) or lob fireballs, which they might also do against an improved invisible rogue.But with an improved invisible rogue, they can fight by his side.Depends on what you call &quot;useless&quot;, of course.So now you have a rogue fighting by his lonesome all the module's encounters with only marginal help from the group.&nbsp; Does the fact that the enemies are blind make up for the fact that the rogue is mostly fighting alone ?&nbsp; Might be, I don't know.&nbsp; Depends on the encounters I guess.&nbsp; From a metagaming POV, of course, the rest of the party would probably not enjoy being the rogue's cheering squad encounter after encounter.This is definitely one of those things that look better on paper than in actuality.&nbsp; Our group has been on the lookout to use this particular tactic for 4 levels now, and we have only found it (marginally) useful a grand total of once.&nbsp; The rest of the time, monsters with blindsight/tremorsense, lots of powerful monsters whom the rogue can't realistically fight alone (esp. element-resistant ones) and especially the narrowness of the battlefield and presence of other PCs nearby just don't make this a good idea.&nbsp; I would definitely have been better off taking a useful 4th level spell instead.&nbsp; Like Freedom of Movement or Greater Magic Weapon.I'm not saying it's a bad strategy but there are serious downsides.Dude, I already told you that this was cheesy. I agree.&nbsp; The solution is probably to tone its duration down to something like 10m per level or so.&nbsp; That's not what I was arguing about.But it's still not as good as 4 improved invisibility spells (except for the duration).&nbsp; For one, it limits everybody's vision to 30 feet.&nbsp; Bad for spellcasters, usually.&nbsp; Also, while an invisible enemy might be anywhere, a blindsight-equipped enemy must remain in a set dark area (albeit a large one).&nbsp; Darkness is also easier to dispel than invisibility.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="HeavyG, post: 505900, member: 431"] Granted. Your enemies can't target the rogue, just like if he was invisible. They still have to be 60' away or the spells will cancel each other, thus negating this tactic. And they're everybit as useless against the rogue's opponents as the enemies are useless against the rogue. Sure, they might fire arrows blindly in the dark (like that's going to work) or lob fireballs, which they might also do against an improved invisible rogue. But with an improved invisible rogue, they can fight by his side. Depends on what you call "useless", of course. So now you have a rogue fighting by his lonesome all the module's encounters with only marginal help from the group. Does the fact that the enemies are blind make up for the fact that the rogue is mostly fighting alone ? Might be, I don't know. Depends on the encounters I guess. From a metagaming POV, of course, the rest of the party would probably not enjoy being the rogue's cheering squad encounter after encounter. This is definitely one of those things that look better on paper than in actuality. Our group has been on the lookout to use this particular tactic for 4 levels now, and we have only found it (marginally) useful a grand total of once. The rest of the time, monsters with blindsight/tremorsense, lots of powerful monsters whom the rogue can't realistically fight alone (esp. element-resistant ones) and especially the narrowness of the battlefield and presence of other PCs nearby just don't make this a good idea. I would definitely have been better off taking a useful 4th level spell instead. Like Freedom of Movement or Greater Magic Weapon. I'm not saying it's a bad strategy but there are serious downsides. Dude, I already told you that this was cheesy. I agree. The solution is probably to tone its duration down to something like 10m per level or so. That's not what I was arguing about. But it's still not as good as 4 improved invisibility spells (except for the duration). For one, it limits everybody's vision to 30 feet. Bad for spellcasters, usually. Also, while an invisible enemy might be anywhere, a blindsight-equipped enemy must remain in a set dark area (albeit a large one). Darkness is also easier to dispel than invisibility. [/QUOTE]

Verification